[quote]Well, firstly, the only reason they head for the UK is because our economy is doing well enough to provide jobs for them, which many of our own indigenous folk can't be bothered to do - so who are the spongers?[/quote]
No problem with anybody contributing to the UK, and who's anyone to stop a guy earning a living? I agree -see relevant thread- that the UK is mighty prosperous at the moment, and I love diversity in society...........the downside is that too much immigration can stress NHS treatment. Go ask local doctors and hospital employees in areas where immigrants in large numbers have taken residence.
[quote]The Daily Mail is anti-immigration and plainly racist.[/quote]
Can't comment as I've not read the Daily Mail for about 10 years. Even then, it was someone else's at work, and I skimmed the pages. I can however conclude that your statement is certainly not practising what you preach. I'm sure there was a recent thread in where you criticised 'generalisation', and since there would be a lot of different people, from differing backgrounds, all contributing to such a national tabloid, then your statement is definitely a sweeping one.........unless you know every employee personally, or they've stated such a stance.
[quote]I contend that while being anti-racist does not mean you are definitely racist, there is enough of a correlation between the two mindsets to equate them.[/quote]
Again, that would mean generalisation. BNP supporters love to generalise, but all I was trying to point out is that people who may be worried (and express their views) about immigration, should be listened to, and respected. All they get it condemnation from a lot of 'elitist-in-their-own-way' opponents.
Both sides are elitist, both sides are ignorant, and both sides clearly generalise. That makes both sides wrong and no-one should claim the moral high ground whether 'pro' or 'anti'.
Immigration - we are being shat upon
-
Sam Slater
- Posts: 11624
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Immigration - we are being shat upon
[i]I used to spend a lot of time criticizing Islam on here in the noughties - but things are much better now.[/i]
Re: Immigration - we are being shat upon
warren zevon rip wrote:
>>
No pat on the back from me, WZR. Talk about an extreme view.
What you appear to be saying there is that anyone who calls for any sort of curbs and controls on immigration is by definition a racist. Which is clearly a ridiculous thing to say, and harks back to my own previous post in this thread.
Because you seem to be saying that "you're either for immigration, or you're against it. Any other view is racist".
In other words your view seems to be that there can be no such thing as "controlled immigration" - because that would be racist !
Millions of ordinary people are in favour of some form of contols on immigration. Indeed - to use your own words - they are "not against immigration but ..." (the "but" being that "it can't just be a free-for all"). That doesn't mean that they're racist, BNP members, Daily Mail readers or whatever else you might want to brand them as.
Many other countries have such controls that are far stricter than those in place in the UK - Switzerland, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, the USA and indeed most other EU countries. So does that mean that these countries are all "racist"?
In fact you'd probably find that many countries in the Middle East and Africa have them as well and that you can't just buy a one-way ticket there and settle as a foreigner (not that these places would probably be many people's first choice destinations, but that's not really the point).
Are these countries "racist" as well, by your own definition? (Or perhaps you're one of these people who thinks that "only white people can be racist").
>>
No pat on the back from me, WZR. Talk about an extreme view.
What you appear to be saying there is that anyone who calls for any sort of curbs and controls on immigration is by definition a racist. Which is clearly a ridiculous thing to say, and harks back to my own previous post in this thread.
Because you seem to be saying that "you're either for immigration, or you're against it. Any other view is racist".
In other words your view seems to be that there can be no such thing as "controlled immigration" - because that would be racist !
Millions of ordinary people are in favour of some form of contols on immigration. Indeed - to use your own words - they are "not against immigration but ..." (the "but" being that "it can't just be a free-for all"). That doesn't mean that they're racist, BNP members, Daily Mail readers or whatever else you might want to brand them as.
Many other countries have such controls that are far stricter than those in place in the UK - Switzerland, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, the USA and indeed most other EU countries. So does that mean that these countries are all "racist"?
In fact you'd probably find that many countries in the Middle East and Africa have them as well and that you can't just buy a one-way ticket there and settle as a foreigner (not that these places would probably be many people's first choice destinations, but that's not really the point).
Are these countries "racist" as well, by your own definition? (Or perhaps you're one of these people who thinks that "only white people can be racist").
Re: Immigration - we are being shat upon
warren zevon rip wrote:
>>>
Christ, what total fucking arrogance.
So you're the man with all the answers then? You're the man to tell all us poor misguided souls how we should be voting are you? Better put you in charge then. Sheesh!!!
You want to talk about "basic economics"? Well I think that anyone who has a grasp of even schoolboy economics would tell you that unlimited immigration (of the type you appear to be advocating) is unsustainable anywhere, in any country, for a whole raft of reasons.
That's not "ignorant prejudice", it's a fact.
Sustainable population density is just one of these reasons. Or do you want to see the UK entirely concreted over to accommodate a population of 200 or 300 million all in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity"?
>>>
Utter cobblers.
What about all the Chinese, Koreans, Thais, Indians, Arabs, Persians (Iranians), Eastern Europeans, Western Europeans, Japanese and all the rest who've settled there over the past 200 or so years - and continue to arrive there? Sure they have immigration controls in the USA (and rightly so, IMHO) but the USA is still the most ethnically diverse country on the planet and was built on immigration virtually from scratch over a relatively short period of time (about 300 years, give or take a decade or two).
>>
A "huge part"??!! I don't think so! Care to back that up with some figures if you're going to start coming out with outlandish claims like that?? Because I think you'll find that immigrants from ("white") Commonwealth countries make up only a small proportion of immigrants to the UK compared with Eastern Europeans or people from the Sub-Continent.
Anyway, to say it's "racist" to call for curbs on Eastern European immigration is just plain daft - given that most people from that part of the world are of the 'Caucasian' race themselves.
>>
Much is often made of this but it's not unique to George Dubya at all. I don't have much time for him either to be honest, but have you ever considered the possibility that there might (just might) be more blacks on death row for the simple reason that more blacks (for whatever reason) have actually committed more capital offences and that it actually has nothing to do with skin colour (despite what many blacks claim)? But I suppose that even suggesting such a thing makes me a "racist" by your definition.
>>
That's about the only thing you've written that I agree with you on.
>>>
Christ, what total fucking arrogance.
So you're the man with all the answers then? You're the man to tell all us poor misguided souls how we should be voting are you? Better put you in charge then. Sheesh!!!
You want to talk about "basic economics"? Well I think that anyone who has a grasp of even schoolboy economics would tell you that unlimited immigration (of the type you appear to be advocating) is unsustainable anywhere, in any country, for a whole raft of reasons.
That's not "ignorant prejudice", it's a fact.
Sustainable population density is just one of these reasons. Or do you want to see the UK entirely concreted over to accommodate a population of 200 or 300 million all in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity"?
>>>
Utter cobblers.
What about all the Chinese, Koreans, Thais, Indians, Arabs, Persians (Iranians), Eastern Europeans, Western Europeans, Japanese and all the rest who've settled there over the past 200 or so years - and continue to arrive there? Sure they have immigration controls in the USA (and rightly so, IMHO) but the USA is still the most ethnically diverse country on the planet and was built on immigration virtually from scratch over a relatively short period of time (about 300 years, give or take a decade or two).
>>
A "huge part"??!! I don't think so! Care to back that up with some figures if you're going to start coming out with outlandish claims like that?? Because I think you'll find that immigrants from ("white") Commonwealth countries make up only a small proportion of immigrants to the UK compared with Eastern Europeans or people from the Sub-Continent.
Anyway, to say it's "racist" to call for curbs on Eastern European immigration is just plain daft - given that most people from that part of the world are of the 'Caucasian' race themselves.
>>
Much is often made of this but it's not unique to George Dubya at all. I don't have much time for him either to be honest, but have you ever considered the possibility that there might (just might) be more blacks on death row for the simple reason that more blacks (for whatever reason) have actually committed more capital offences and that it actually has nothing to do with skin colour (despite what many blacks claim)? But I suppose that even suggesting such a thing makes me a "racist" by your definition.
>>
That's about the only thing you've written that I agree with you on.
Re: Immigration - we are being shat upon
warren zevon rip wrote:
>>
Woolly left-wing claptrap of the first order, and displaying a staggering level of naivity.
You seriously believe that all immigrants to the UK already have a job lined up on arrival?!! What planet do you live on??!!
And what about the tens of thousands of illegals from Africa who head for Italy and Spain (countries with comparable immigration levels to the UK) in overcrowded, rickety old boats? None of them have a pot to piss in - having paid what little they already had to the people smugglers to cover their passage. And none of them has any sort of job - or even the prospect of a job - lined up once they arrive.
They're nothing more economic migrants chancing their arm and throwing themselves on the mercy of their host state of choice once they arrive, hoping for the best.
As for Eastern Europeans in the UK, you'll probably this as "racist scaremongering", but this makes revealing reading:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti ... xpand=true
- Eric
>>
Woolly left-wing claptrap of the first order, and displaying a staggering level of naivity.
You seriously believe that all immigrants to the UK already have a job lined up on arrival?!! What planet do you live on??!!
And what about the tens of thousands of illegals from Africa who head for Italy and Spain (countries with comparable immigration levels to the UK) in overcrowded, rickety old boats? None of them have a pot to piss in - having paid what little they already had to the people smugglers to cover their passage. And none of them has any sort of job - or even the prospect of a job - lined up once they arrive.
They're nothing more economic migrants chancing their arm and throwing themselves on the mercy of their host state of choice once they arrive, hoping for the best.
As for Eastern Europeans in the UK, you'll probably this as "racist scaremongering", but this makes revealing reading:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/arti ... xpand=true
- Eric